The Future Of Miyazaki Art: Can AI Capture The Soul Of Ghibli Magic Without Infringing IP Rights?

Author: Priyadarshini Chakraborty, Jogesh Chandra Chaudhuri Law College (University Of Calcutta)

The fast and rapid rise of advanced software's potential moral consequences of the technological tools, or to put it in simple terms, the ethical implications for AI and digital tools' capability to change artistic styles, has endangered the real work of an artist, like Studio Ghibli's trending artistic work and stories being completely served to the masses within a few minutes. The entire technological world is trending with the actual artwork of Miyazaki. Undoubtedly, AI and digital tools can copy any art style, but the question is whether AI can replace the originality of real art forms and their copyrights. This research paper examines in depth the legal limits of computer and technology content, highlighting spin-off content, its use, and the ongoing debate on the problem of authorship in the digital era. It also focuses on the concern of whether technology can genuinely portray real human emotional depth and the cultural importance of Ghibli Studio. It is undoubtedly a fact that software can replicate itself in any art form, especially in the current digital world. Still, the question is whether it can replace the touch of human emotion and philosophical currents of human drama, which is a speciality of Hayao Miyazaki's way of portraying the story. The paper concludes by suggesting adopting a better-balanced approach, such as adopting digital ethical practices, strict IP regulations, and respecting the originality of artistic work. The most important aspect is to respect and support the traditional human art depiction of Studio Ghibli rather than to make such a unique art form extinct.

Keywords

Studio Ghibli, Hayao Miyazaki, intellectual property rights, copyright law, fair use doctrine, cultural heritage protection, AI in art, digital art, AI tools, creativity, and technology.

The magical, enchanting, and heartwarming world introduced by Studio Ghibli and created and crafted by the absolute legendary Hayao Miyazaki has captivated people's hearts across varied generations for time immemorial. The amount of human expressions, emotions, and humbleness that it carries towards external and internal bonds of humankind, shown so beautifully through such artwork, is the best example of artistic temperament. The portrayal of such real, beautiful yet simple human emotions put all together in such a warm cinematographic motion picture is itself a commendable achievement of the artist in his entire life span. To put it in simple terms, viewers and admirers somewhere praise as well as hate Hayao Miyazaki for introducing them to such a beautiful and warm world yet in reality not being able to be a part of it except in their imagination. The most concerning question that arises in the contemporary technological world is the replacement of human artistic emotions with AI and technological artwork and its dominance in such areas of human imagination creation. This conflict between AI and the original human artwork of Ghibli has not only raised deep concern about copyright law but also an infringement of artistic emotions and cultural heritage.

The modern contemporary world, with its fast changes, especially in the technological field, is indeed a remarkable achievement of mankind, but does it bring forth danger too? That is the real question that needs to be answered. The technological improvisation to edit content is a way to save time, but in reality, does it lack any of the passions of human empathy and the soft touch of human emotions that a normal human being carries with himself throughout his own life? That is another matter of grave concern that both AI and humankind are facing criticism about. The recent software development to edit and create images of Ghibli Studio art is one such example where technology and mankind are currently facing trials of human emotions. It is indeed a matter of fact that artists in such a field will be worried about their years and lifetime of practice and dedication towards their beloved work in which they have given their entire existence to be just produced to users within a fraction of a second. Such an exercise of an act in legal terms is a mere copyright infringement.

Under the Copyright Law and Intellectual Property Rights, the original, unique, and creative works of the artist are protected. It claims them as their sole owner, and such rights cannot be infringed by a third party. Any digital content that closely resembles cartoon characters, artistic styles, and narratives might face trial. The Copyright Law strictly prohibits any such acts of unauthorized adaptations of the original works of the artist or any such derivatives by third parties. The artwork is created and edited by technological or software tools that bear strong and close similarities to the intellectual property rights of Ghibli Studios' unique art, and then it is an infringement of their copyright.

Another issue that arises regarding the legal boundaries of Ghibli's art is that critics have come up with or opined with an opinion that it is not an infringement of intellectual property rights as it is converting content that is new, different, and original. To sum up in detail, it is a fair use. However, the Honourable Courts consider the Doctrine of Fair Use with certain factors such as the extent to which the content is original, the purpose behind the work, and its impact on the market. It is a fact of the matter that some content or things that are created digitally or with the help of software tools might be seen as innovative reinterpretations, but it also cannot be overlooked that if content closely resembles its original work or the base originality of the content, it will simply amount to infringement of copyright or the intellectual property rights.

As digital and technological tools have evolved themselves, or, to put it in simple words, have become more advanced, the real question lies as to who owns such digital works of content. Whether the creator, the software developer, or no one at all? Such a question remains unanswered in many jurisdictions until trials in court are being held. The traditional law surrounding copyright claims and intellectual property rights grants sole ownership to human creators only; the real complication comes with the AI-generated content and its liability. If any artist uses digital or technical tools to create Ghibli-style or Ghibli-inspired content, they may be recognized as a copyright holder. However, it is a real matter of fact that if AI or an algorithm significantly contributes to the creative or innovative procedure, ownership disputes arise. There are many criticisms by different scholars and specialists who have deep knowledge about the legal backgrounds of technology law who believe that there are various jurisdictions that consider and recognize to the primary degree that the software developers are the ones who are the rightful owners, while on the other hand and similar grounds there also other specialists who argue and believe to their extent that all those contents which are created and generated by AI should belong to the public domain. The recent legal development in AI Copyrights leaves us with weak legal boundaries that complicate various things, leaving artists, developers, and legal experts confused and bound by weak legal regulations and rights of their digital authorship.

The increasing use of AI in various fields and its reliance especially in the context of creating art has raised serious questions about copyright infringement. When the results closely show an exact existing artistic works by a legendary person. In the scenario of Studio Ghibli, all the results that are being generated by AI have a very close resemblance to the original artistic styles and temperament of the works of Hayao Miyazaki. Since the purpose of copyright law is to protect original works, any unauthorized reproductions of the original artwork can result in legal liability like penalties, compulsory removal of content and reputational harm for those responsible.

 If AI content which nearly generates the original artwork, the question arises as to who is liable for the infringement, the individual who has created the software, the user who is creating the content, or the AI itself? At present, there are no specific copyright laws which provide a clear background of infringement of copyright which has put the entire scenario to a vague trial. Courts on the other hand too examine how much an AI-generated work transforms the original material before deciding if it qualifies for the fair use doctrine.

The Miyazaki art form has highlighted the most important question that has been interpreted by the human race which is whether technology will replace human beings? It is a fact that digital and technological tools can in doubt copy the thematic and visual representation of Ghibli's artwork, the main concern lies that such AI-generated contents lack the human expression, empathy and the complications of human relationships that are iconically and beautifully portrayed in the Ghibli Motion picture.

It is often seen that AI or technologically interpreted forms of narration often miss the emotional frequency viability and authenticity of accountability that comes from real-life experiences, personal struggles, and human emotions. Often it is observed that Artists mix up their work with intangible qualities of life like memories, cultural heritage, and philosophical perspective that adds art to its soul. On the other hand, technology can interpret design and style changes in essential characteristics, it cannot hold up or capture the nuances and feelings of human sentiment, the spontaneity of creative inspiration, or the cultural depth embedded in a work of art. The traditional and decades-old legacy of the creation of such a beautiful art form is indeed lost through such technological modifications and changes. The beautiful and warm cinematographic representation of a beautifully portrayed art in such a demographic manner of soft and delicate human emotions is itself a huge lifetime achievement of Hayao Miyazaki, there is no doubt that AI and digital tools can replace the originality of such a beautiful art form.

Various existing research studies and discusses AI-generated artwork’s legal boundaries, especially regarding copyright and its fair use. The current copyright law which was established long before has weak mentionings of AI authorship which raises debates over ownership.  The digital replication of the original works lacks human emotions and touch. While literature covers the problems that mainly arise out of legal and ethical issues, few studies are evident that help determine AI's impact on works like Studio Ghibli. This paper tries to bridge these gaps, assessing how AI-generated artistic replication of original work interacts with copyright laws and artistic integrity.

This entire paper  tries to its varied extent to portray and highlight an active approach  of the consequences as well as the ultimate results if AI is adopted blindly . Its main motive and aim is to understand how copyright laws, fair use principles, and intellectual property rights apply to AI-generated art, particularly when  the issue comes to drawing references which  are taken from inspirations that are culturally significant forms of works like those of Studio Ghibli. The research also pays attention to legal legislation and the need to adopt a more structured legislation to avoid future dilemmas and comprehension concerning infringement of copyrights. Moreover an aim has also been tried to achieve in this particular study of interpreting the infringement of copyright is not to bound it only to its legal implications. A mere attempt has also been tried to closely look at the loss of the original artform of such a heartwarming form of art which has been introduced by the legendary Hayao MIyazaki. Future interpretation and replication of such forms of great art will pose a high risk to the entire society.. 

The study also tries to take a thorough approach by analyzing  the existing legal frameworks and the question of whether it is sufficient enough to guard the individuals right in the contemporary world of fast changing technology also including international copyright treaties like the Berne Convention and judicial rulings on AI-generated works.

The study highlights and reveals the fact that AI can closely replicate Studio Ghibli’s artistic style like its colour schemes, character designs and even the animation styles. Again it is also a true fact that in reality it simply cannot highlight the character with more human emotions which the artform of Ghibli does.  Both legally and  Ethically AI generated content cannot create human originality and artistic value. The study also brings to the notice of the urgent need for clearer copyright laws to make sure that AI supports, rather than undermines, artistic integrity and temperament.

This study explores and tries to interpret the legal, ethical and artistic challenges of AI-generated art which has drawn its inspiration from Studio Ghibli. It is a fact that AI in its true sense can replicate Ghibli’s visual style of art. In reality, it struggles to showcase the emotional depth of Miyazaki’s. The research highlights the urgent and immediate need to update copyright regulations and guidelines to create a balance between technological advancement and human work. Future studies should involve how to change legal frameworks with time and how artists should adopt AI’s role in the creative industry of art.

The rapid quantum growth of technology and its adaptation for easy day-to-day work has created thousands of debates about the use of technology especially in places where original work and its copyright infringement is discussed. There is no doubt in the fact that AI and Digital tools can replicate the artwork of Studio Ghibli but the main point lies in whether it can create the original work which is made with human emotions, feelings and warm gestures which is itself shown in the work. The main legal challenge that arises in defining ownership and also interpreting whether AI-generated works consist of fair use or is simply a copyright infringement. The future of digital art depends on ensuring that technology praises and supports original artwork rather than replaces it.

1. Rebecca Tushnet, The First Amendment and Fair Use in the Digital Age, 78 Fordham L. Rev. 677, 690 (2009).

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol78/iss2/12

2. Pamela Samuelson, The Quest for a Sound Conception of Copyright’s Derivative Work Right, 101 Mich. L. Rev. 1401, 1412 (2003).

https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol101/iss6/2/

3. Edward Lee, Fair Use Avoidance in Copyright Law, 59 B.C. L. Rev. 1, 15 (2018).

https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol59/iss1/2/

4. Mark A. Lemley & Bryan Casey, Fair Learning: Copyright and AI, 60 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 349, 360 (2019).

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmlr/vol60/iss2/3/

5. Jessica Litman, Lawful Personal Use, 85 Tex. L. Rev. 1871, 1893 (2007).

https://texaslawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Litman-85-TLR-1871.pdf

6. Daniel Gervais, Artificial Intelligence and Copyright, 52 Vand. J. Transnat’l L. 1121, 1135 (2019).

https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vjtl/vol52/iss4/6/

7. Sukanya Sarkar, Exclusive: India Recognises AI as Co-Author of Copyrighted Artwork, Managing IP (Aug. 5, 2021), https://www.managingip.com/article/2a5czmpwixyj23wyqct1c/exclusive-india-recognises-ai-as-co-author-of-copyrighted-artwork.

8. Steven Seidenberg, Who Owns the Copyright in AI-Generated Works?, ABA Journal (Nov. 10, 2020),

https://www.abajournal.com/web/article/copyright-generative-ai-what-a-mess

9. Madhavi Sunder, IP in the Age of AI: Who Owns Creativity?, World Intellectual Property Review (May 15, 2022),

https://www.worldipreview.com/inta-2024/the-future-of-ip-in-an-ai-powered-world

10. Nehaa Chaudhari & Anirudh Rastogi, AI-Generated Content and Copyright in India: The Legal Challenges Ahead, The Indian Express (July 20, 2023)

https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/artificial-intelligence/generative-ai-regulation-in-india-what-lawyers-say-8667259/